Betriu A, Masotti M, Serra A, Alonso J, Fernández-Avilés F, Gimeno F, Colman T, Zueco J, Delcan J L, García E, Calabuig J
Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999 Nov 1;34(5):1498-506. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(99)00366-6.
The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that stent implantation in de novo coronary artery lesions would result in lower restenosis rates and better long-term clinical outcomes than balloon angioplasty.
Placement of an intracoronary stent, as compared with balloon angioplasty, has proven to reduce the rate of restenosis. However, the long-term clinical benefit of stenting over angioplasty has not been assessed in large randomized trials.
We randomly assigned 452 patients with either stable (129 patients) or unstable (323 patients) angina pectoris to elective stent implantation (229 patients) or standard balloon angioplasty (223 patients). Coronary angiography was performed at baseline, immediately after the procedure and six months later. End points were the rate of restenosis at six months and a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI) and target vessel revascularization over four years of follow-up.
Procedural success rate was achieved in 84% and 95% (balloon angioplasty vs. stent, respectively). The increase in the minimal luminal diameter was greater in the stent group both after the intervention (2.02 +/- 0.6 mm vs. 1.43 +/- 0.6 mm in the angioplasty group; p < 0.0001), and at six-month follow-up (1.98 +/- 0.7 mm vs. 1.63 +/- 0.7 mm; p < 0.001). The corresponding restenosis rates were 22% and 37%, respectively (p < 0.002). After four years, no differences in mortality (2.7% vs. 2.4%) and nonfatal MI (2.2% vs. 2.8%) were found between the stent and the angioplasty groups, respectively. However, the requirement for further revascularization procedures of the target lesions was significantly reduced in the stent group (12% vs. 25% in the angioplasty group; relative risk 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.75, p = 0.0006); most of the repeat procedures (84%) were carried out within six months of entry into the study.
Patients who received an intracoronary stent showed a lower rate of restenosis than those treated with conventional balloon angioplasty. The benefit of stenting was maintained four years after implantation, as manifested by a significant reduction in the need for repeat revascularization.
本研究旨在验证以下假设,即与球囊血管成形术相比,在初发冠状动脉病变中植入支架可降低再狭窄率并带来更好的长期临床结局。
与球囊血管成形术相比,冠状动脉内支架置入已被证明可降低再狭窄率。然而,在大型随机试验中尚未评估支架置入术相对于血管成形术的长期临床益处。
我们将452例稳定型(129例)或不稳定型(323例)心绞痛患者随机分配至择期支架置入组(229例)或标准球囊血管成形术组(223例)。在基线、术后即刻及术后6个月进行冠状动脉造影。终点指标为6个月时的再狭窄率以及随访4年期间的死亡、心肌梗死(MI)和靶血管血运重建的复合终点。
球囊血管成形术组和支架置入组的手术成功率分别为84%和95%。干预后支架组的最小管腔直径增加幅度更大(血管成形术组为1.43±0.6mm,支架组为2.02±0.6mm;p<0.0001),6个月随访时也是如此(血管成形术组为1.63±0.7mm,支架组为1.98±0.7mm;p<0.001)。相应的再狭窄率分别为22%和37%(p<0.002)。4年后,支架组和血管成形术组在死亡率(2.7%对2.4%)和非致命性MI(2.2%对2.8%)方面未发现差异。然而,支架组靶病变进一步血运重建治疗的需求显著降低(血管成形术组为25%,支架组为12%;相对危险度0.49,95%置信区间0.32至0.75,p=0.0006);大多数重复手术(84%)在进入研究后的6个月内进行。
接受冠状动脉内支架置入的患者再狭窄率低于接受传统球囊血管成形术治疗的患者。支架置入的益处植入后4年仍得以维持,表现为重复血运重建需求的显著降低。